Due to the large volume of election letters, the following appear only on the web.
To the Editor:
The recent tightening of the race for President has me scratching my head as never before. For starters, how is it not obvious that the candidate who was willing to let mortgage foreclosures bottom out and the American auto industry slide into oblivion is hardly a friend of the middle class?
How is it not obvious that a CEO who profited from the liquidation of American-made businesses and admits he enjoys “firing people” is not the candidate of working people?
How is it not obvious that a candidate who accepts the beneficence of Donald Trump and Rush Limbaugh despite the implicit racism of their attacks on President Obama and his citizenship is not the candidate of minorities—or, for that matter, anyone whose name ends in a vowel?
How is it not obvious that a candidate who won't reveal his tax returns and deliberately distorts the record of President Obama is no friend the truth?
How is it not obvious that a candidate who won't defend women's right to choose is not the candidate of women?
How is it not obvious that a candidate who's handed the American electorate one “Etch-a-Sketch moment” after another on critical issues from abortion to Afghanistan is not a candidate of principle? And how is not obvious that his remarks disparaging the 47 percent of Americans on some form of federal assistance are in fact a slur on virtually all of us or someone we love?
In short, how is it not obvious to the nearly half of American voters said to be leaning towards Gov. Mitt Romney that his only true constituency is the one percent with annual incomes of a half million dollars or more, and that his real mission is to expose an already reeling America to further plunder by this very faction? How is it not obvious that, sooner or later, a President Romney would surely profit from such a scenario himself? Or if all of this is obvious, then what would move such large numbers of hard-working, freedom-loving and patriotic Americans to support the Governor not because of their own best interests, but in spite of them?
Undoubtedly, some are driven by the very emotions of fear and prejudice that Trump, Limbaugh et al. are out to inflame and exploit. Many more have been taken in, whether by phony GOP rhetoric about “smaller government” or by Romney's eleventh-hour conversion to the concept of caring about “one hundred percent” of us.
But I suspect that many others have simply succumbed to the power of their own impatience. They want the economy fixed Yesterday, unmindful of President Clinton's perfectly reasonable observation that the Republican does not exist who could have undone in one term the grand-scale mess created by George Bush and his rapacious Wall Street cronies.
Did Obama spend taxpayer money to fund his economic recovery plan, a plan still unfolding with excruciating slowness? Absolutely, and lots of it. But seriously: how is it not obvious by now that BOTH parties will tax and spend—always have, always will? The question is only On What—or, put another way, which party better reflects the core values of the American electorate? What kind of society do we really want to be?
For readers of the mindset that “I've got mine—too bad about you,” Gov. Romney is definitely The Man. But for those who'd rather build a society in which success is a group effort, and we're all in this together, then President Obama is clearly the candidate of choice.
Let all of us who want the latter kind of society show the President our continued support on November 6th.
Sincerely,
Linnea Schroeder
Northwood
What Does President Obama's Tax Plan Mean to Me?
I am a single woman with 0 dependents and my estimated annual income is approximately $22,222.
Under Mitt Romney's tax plan, I would pay $183 more in taxes in 2013. Under President Obama's plan, my tax savings would be $438 if Congress acts on his 2013 tax plan.
By the end of President Obama's first term, I will save $1,600: $800 from the Making-Work-Pay Credit and $800 from the payroll-tax cut.
If I took my part-time, beaded-accessory-making business more seriously, I could take advantage of the eighteen small-business tax cuts that President Obama has already signed into law. Several tax cuts were in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the Affordable Care Act and the HIRE Act. These laws contain eight tax cuts. One provision excludes up to 75% capital gains on investments. Another provides a tax credit for the cost of health insurance for employees. Tax credits are also provided for small businesses that hire people who have been out of work for at least two months.
The Small Business Jobs Act, signed into law in September 2010, has eight more tax cuts and credits in it: raising the expensing limit to $500,000; simplifying the rules for claiming a deduction for mobile phone use; creating a deduction for health-care costs for the self-employed; allowing greater deductions for start-up expenses and eliminating taxes on capital gains from investments.
In December 2010, President Obama signed a tax bill that allowed all businesses to expense 100% of their new investments until the end of 2011. It also extended the elimination of capital gains taxes for small business investments through the end of 2012. The President's budget proposal seeks to make that tax cut permanent.
Mitt Romney's tax proposals would revive the same top-down economics that failed and led us into the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. The top 1% have received the lion's share of the tax breaks over the past several decades, while the remaining 99% have seen their incomes, in real terms, decline during the same timeframe. If relieving the tax “burden” of the wealthiest 1% worked so well. Why did so many people lose their jobs during George Walker Bush's administration? Trickle-down economics doesn't work.
Henry Ford sold so many Model Ts because he paid his assembly-line workers enough money to purchase his company's products. Malden Mills, makers of Polar Tec Fleece, paid their workers health insurance after a fire damaged most of the mill buildings—and continued to pay those benefits until they could rebuild.
In December 2007, prior to the collapse of the world economy, the U.S. unemployment rate was 5.0% and had been at or below that figure for the previous 30 months. When the recession officially ended (according to the National Bureau of Economic Research) in June 2009, the unemployment rate was 9.5%. In October 2009, the unemployment rate peaked at 10.0%. However, significant portions of the unemployed have been without work for 27 weeks or more during this recession, which makes it different from the other ten recessions we've experienced since 1948 (Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics).
Trickle-up economics is a more likely description for the way our economy works. Anyone can start a business, if they can find the capital to get started. Individuals can turn their dreams into reality and create a business entity. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, most U.S. establishments are small: 88% have less than 20 employees, 95% have less than 50 employees and 98% have less than 100 employees. These business account for more than 46% of jobs created, based on a ten-year average (Source: Quarterly Net Employment Growth by Firm Size, 1993:Q2—2003:Q4, Dynamic-Sizing Methodology, Seasonally Adjusted, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics). Consumers account for more than 70% of purchasing power in the U.S. economy. If consumers don't have disposable income, the economy can't recover at anything more than a snail's pace.
The typical millionaire in Mitt Romney's income bracket paid, on average, 25%. Yet, Mitt Romney paid an annual federal tax rate of 14%. What strategies did Mitt Romney's tax team employ to bring his annual federal tax rate down by 11 points?
According to www.whitehouse.gov, President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama jointly paid an annual federal tax rate of 26.25% for 2010 (based on gross annual income). They also donated 14.2% of their adjusted gross income to 36 different charities, one of which is a scholarship fund for children of fallen and disabled soldiers. They also paid 2.98% in state income tax. Doesn't that sound fair to you?
Sharon Reynolds
Dover
Request LTE prior to 11-6 if possible:
Have you noticed? Every time we think of Romney:
Major storm Sandy provided a lot of hot air
So did the Romney financial supporters with attack ads
Romney projects himself as a well-oiled weathervane
We thought that Romney was a Flip Flopper
Did anyone ever review the Romney plan?
Romney wants increased Defense spending to reward his financial backers
Romney Care will care for 53% in the 1% category at the expense of the 99% in the 47% group
Romnesia is a pre-existing untreatable condition covered by Obama Care.
Romney believes in Chinese Jeeps
Romney leaked that 47% of us are not of any concern to him - he was serious!
Which Romney will get the most votes?
Romney is upset because the U.S. Is on an upward and positive track
Please vote - it is your right!
Richard B. "Dick" LaBonte
Somersworth
The Wrong One
To the Editor:
Did you vote for Barack Obama in 2008? A lot of people did. What a
testimony to just how far we as a nation have come in terms of racial
harmony and diversity. Only decades earlier a man like Obama, a black
man, couldn't drink from the same water fountain as a white man, let
alone become president of the United States.
On Nov 4, 2008, millions gathered at the ballot box to prove that we as a
nation have healed from our disgraceful self-inflicted wounds of racial
abuse, bias and division. That we could elect an African-American to lead
the free world is indeed a very good thing. However, we just happened to
elect the wrong African-American.
In life, we sometimes find that the idea of a thing is far better than
the thing itself. As a boy, I once ordered a pair of X-ray glasses that
promised to allow me to see the bones within my hand. The two weeks it
took the glasses to arrive seemed like an eternity. Once they did arrive,
I ripped into the package and put them on. It's difficult to express my
level of disappointment as I quickly discovered the glasses merely formed
a halo effect around objects creating the illusion of transparency. I
felt embarrassed and realized I got took.
Barack Obama's presidency has been a halo effect. Like I did so many
years ago, in 2008 America fell victim to false advertising. As the past
four years have demonstrated beyond any serious doubt, the idea of
President Obama was far better than the reality of President Obama. We
were promised the world. We were promised transparency but we were sold
an illusion. We got took.
During the 2008 campaign, a then-Sen. Obama promised us that, if elected,
we would look back upon the moment he took office and “tell our children
that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and
good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans
began to slow and our planet began to heal; that this was the moment when
we ended war, secured our nation and restored our image as the last best
hope on earth.” That was the idea of President Obama. That is what many
good well-meaning people voted for. That was the hope offered and the
change promised. That is not what we got.
Though certainly not a comprehensive analysis, during the second
presidential debate, Mitt Romney in response to President Obama's
attempts to gloss over his mounting leadership failures, summarized a few
big ones. While addressing an audience member who voted for Obama in
2008, Romney observed, in part, the following:
I think you know better. I think you know these last four years haven't
been as good as the president just described and that you don't feel like
you're confident that the next four years are going to be any better
either.
He said that by now we'd have
unemployment at 5.4%. The difference between where it is and 5.4% is 9
million Americans without work. He said he would have, by now, put
forward a plan to reform Medicare and Social Security because he pointed
out they're on the road to bankruptcy. He would reform them. He'd get
that done. He hasn't even made a proposal on either one.
He said in his first year he'd put
out an immigration plan that would deal with our immigration challenges.
He didn't do it. This is a president who has
not been able to do what he said he'd do. He said that he'd cut the
deficit in half. He hasn't done that either. In fact he doubled it.
He said that by now middle-income
families would have a reduction in their health insurance premiums by
$2,500 a year. It's gone up by $2,500 a year, and if Obamacare is
implemented fully, it'll be another $2,500.
The middle
class is getting crushed under the policies of a president who has not
understood what it takes to get the economy working again. The number of
people who are still looking for work is still 23 million Americans.
There are more people in poverty, one out of six people in poverty.
How about food stamps? When he
took office, 32 million people were on them. Today, 47 million people are
on food stamps. How about the economy? It's growing
more slowly this year than last year, and more slowly last year than the
year before. This president has tried but his
policies haven't worked.
I recently ran into a friend of mine while in Market Basket and he was
wearing a Romney pin. I knew he was a big Obama supporter in 2008. “Mind
if I ask you why you are voting for Mitt Romney?” I asked. “I assume you
are.” His reply was short and to the point: “I got fooled once but refuse
to be fooled twice.” Changing one's mind doesn't always reveal a tendency
toward indecision. Sometimes changing one's mind reveals a tendency
towards wisdom. Please join us in voting for Mitt Romney on November 6th.
John Allard
Barrington
Does It Matter?
Does it matter, whether we have a democratic America or a corporate America? The answer should be, we need both "in balance". This decision has been widely debated and fought over since the inception of our country by our visionary Founding Fathers in the Federalists Papers and in the writings of our Constitution. These determinations were also drenched in the blood and destruction of our Civil War; in the deadly struggles between the interests of industry and unions and all too recently in the contentious fight for women and black's right to vote. The competition continues on between the appetites of business and the survival of our planet's environment and today's carefully crafted political divisiveness between the private and public sectors.
History continues to allow the excesses of extreme corporate interests dominating every facet of our politics, overtly challenging the democratic achievements of our past and the ever more fragile democracy of our present, i.e.
· The continued suppression of minority rights.
· Major tax cuts for the wealthiest 1%
· Supreme Court decision on Citizens United determined that corporations are people
· Corporations were enabled to buy votes and lobbyists, to buy and even draft legislation
· Supreme Court's unprecedented interjection into the 2000 presidential election
· Sending jobs and factories overseas to maximize corporate profits, with minimal taxes and environmental regulations
· Suppressing the minimum wage and obliterating the living wage
· Some state government's determination to demonize and terminate public sector unions, effectively ending worker arbitration
· An outdated Electoral College which obfuscates and countermands the popular vote
· Limiting the rights of women to control the own bodies and protect the own health interests
· Limiting the access to the right of affordable health care
· Plans to privatize Social Security and 'voucherize' Medicare
· Limiting access to an equal and robust public education and plans to privatize all education
· Exploiting the cancer of racism and religious bias for votes
· Allowing religious beliefs to preempt the Constitution
· Blocking the progress of all legislation for sheer partisanship and even thinly veiled racism
· State governments usurping local governments by appointing private companies to take over municipal duties
· Corporate solidarity between the United States and major western countries to dismantle time honored democratic and social covenants
· The general attitude of the 1% that they are the singular chosen saviors of America and are therefore entitled to all its benefits and few of its burdens
· The unacceptable collateral damage from the use of drones
· The blatant obstruction of voter's rights and ultimate elimination of Section 5 of the Civil Rights Act
The perpetrators are well aware that obstructing voter's rights underscores all of the above. In 1965 it was my extreme privilege to join 89 other Coloradoans and participate in the Civil Rights March from Selma to Montgomery Alabama for the voting rights of All American Citizens, which was later affirmed by the Voting Rights Act and signed into law in 1965.
It pains me (and others) beyond words, to see present day, self righteous vigilantes taking the law into their own hands employing regressive efforts to keep certain Americans from voting their franchise, once again!
If we truly believe in a democratic republic, then ALL of us must have an equal opportunity and the requisite obligation to discern which candidate is most likely to uphold the constitutional, civil, religious and socioeconomic rights of All 99% + 1% Americans and afford citizens the time necessary to fight for the restoration of our unique and cherished democratic values.
Barbara & Henry James
Newmarket
Experience Counts
We have all experienced the unpleasantries of dealing with the inexperienced; a wait at a checkout line that seems to take forever, or the bag of goodies at the drive through being everything but what we've ordered – never a welcomed discovery. And in as much as we all count on our doctor in the operating room being qualified to perform the procedure we are undergoing, and in the same manner that the folks aboard that fated US Airways flight were grateful that Capt. “Sully” Sullenberger was at the controls when the geese got in its way; experience counts!
This is not another letter about a candidate because I am a family member or crony; rather it is a plea for the voters of Strafford County to exercise common sense in our upcoming elections.
The choice we have, less than a week from now, is one between experience and novice-ness. The folks running for both Sheriff and Register of Deeds, are very different indeed. While the candidates in Joseph DiGregorio and Lynn Williams, respectively, represent experience in the jobs for which they are seeking our votes, the alternative candidates, wonderful, well-intentioned people as they may be, represent a steep learning curve. In this time of fiscal stress, we need to elect folks who already posses the requisite acumen, talent and working knowledge of not only the job, but of the others in these departments that go to the County complex on a daily basis to their jobs.
Both DiGregorio and Williams have been doing the jobs that they seek election to for a long enough period of time to make them the only continuation-of-service, let alone, financially sound person to fill the shoes of the current department heads.
DiGregorio has been in law enforcement longer than many readers of this letter have been alive, the last 11 years spent as the day-to-day operations administrator as Captain of the Strafford County Sheriff's Office. Without question, his election to the office of High Sheriff will cause the least disruption within the organization. Consider that the union representing the men and women that used to work for the opposition to DiGregorio, has endorsed DiGregorio rather than their former boss; speaks volumes no? DiGregorio is well regarded as an incredible law enforcement officer from the folks I have polled in the profession, serving at the City of Dover's Police Department for 18 or more years there before his tenure at the SCSO.
Lynn Williams has been an employee at the Registry of Deeds for going on 25 years, and has held every job in the Registry since her beginnings as a copy clerk. She too has lead the department as the second-in-command under Leo Lessard, who also is not seeking re-election. Leo aspires to move on to County Commissioner, and he too should be considered very seriously given his wealth of experience in the County's operations during his stead as our Register (Registrar) of Deeds.
Williams understands - and it is a conversation had with her that lead to this Commentary - the nearly insurmountable disruption that results when a department head is replaced by one who has little or no day-to-day operational knowledge of the Department they have been elected to run.
Williams is a very well-liked and knowledgeable leader of the department that all of you have seen if ever you have wandered into the Registry looking for a copy of your deed, or ever needed assistance with a matter pertaining to your land that seemed foreign to you until she or her staff assisted. There should be no doubt that a politician, or some other seeking the office will have much learning to do in an attempt to follow in the footsteps that Lessard and Williams have walked all these years; for Strafford County that is too expensive a venture to finance.
In the election before us, not only do DiGregorio and Williams represent the candidates of demonstrated experience, but in this tough economic time, they represent the candidates that are going to continue the proper and efficient running of these departments and in turn save our County already-stretched budgetary dollars. The “learning curve” has an expense associated with it, in terms of “catch-up” costs and employee retention costs that this county cannot afford, certainly not on two very heavily used levels such as the County Sheriff and our County Register of Deeds.
This is a request that we all use the common sense we have as New Hampshirites, and vote accordingly next Tuesday. The systems are not broke and they need no fixing as a result. Please elect Joseph DiGregorio and Lynn Williams to the positions they have been trained for the last several decades, or so, to hold.
Thank you, Sincerely
Steven F. Hyde, Esq.
Portsmouth
For the Rest of Us
The 2012 campaign season is rapidly coming to a close. The commercials are as thick and dark and biting as black flies, and mailers warn voters to beware of Candidate X or Y. Just this week, one special interest group bought $2 million dollars of ads against me, which is more than I will spend for my whole campaign. Voters will have to wade through it all and make a decision. I hope they will vote for me for Congress because I care deeply about our state and our country and I will serve the good people of New Hampshire, not special interests.
I am a proud direct descendent of General John Stark, whose words “Live Free or Die” are frequently quoted. My roots are deep, and I know, love, and respect this great little state of ours. I grew up in a Republican family and I remember how New Hampshire Republicans and Democrats could disagree about policy but still come together to serve our communities. I believe we must do that again—walk away from the tea party agenda that divides us and join together with a renewed sense of purpose and unity to tackle our problems. During my four years in Congress, I was known for my advocacy for the middle class, for small businesses, and for the American dream. As the Seacoast Media Group and the Portsmouth Herald said, “Our interests were her interests.” I never accepted corporate PAC or DC lobbyist money. I cosponsored the Fair Elections Now Act and the DISCLOSE Act, because without campaign finance reform, we cannot tame the extraordinary influences of special interests that hurt ordinary Americans. I want to continue my efforts for campaign finance reform in Congress.
I served our military and veterans on the Armed Services Committee. As a former military spouse and proud wife of a veteran, I was especially happy to pass the new GI Bill of Rights that thanks our combat veterans with great education benefits. I introduced the bill to get a full-service VA Hospital or equal access to in-state care, and succeeded in getting more clinics and an acute care contract with Concord Hospital. Right now, New Hampshire does not have a Representative on the House Armed Services Committee, which is especially unfortunate because the current Congress' vote for the Sequester has put New Hampshire defense jobs and jobs at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in jeopardy. I want to return to the House Armed Services Committee to advocate for the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, its defense mission, and their incredible workforce.
Serving on the Education and Labor Committee, I cosponsored legislation that cut student loan interest rates in half and increased Pell grants for students. I cosponsored the minimum wage increase, which became law, and cosponsored the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which restores a woman's right to challenge unfair pay, also now the law of the land. I want to serve New Hampshire workers, small businesses, and families again in Congress.
I stood up for the New Hampshire environment. From the Ossipee Pine Barrens to land preservation around Great Bay, from the Presidential Range to clean water, I worked for funding to study and protect our environment.
I held seminars and workshops to help small businesses, including one in Manchester in 2010 to help small defense contractors compete for federal contracts that drew more than 150 people. I voted for the Small Business Jobs Act and eight small-business tax cuts. The Seacoast Media Group and the Portsmouth Herald wrote in their endorsement, “Voters who value bipartisanship will remember Shea-Porter's outstanding work with her Republican colleagues from Maine and New Hampshire to safeguard funding for the new Memorial Bridge and much needed upgrades at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.”
We passed the health care law, saved the American auto industry and all of its jobs, and prevented a Depression. All of these were great accomplishments. But now we need to grow the economy, reduce the debt, protect Medicare from being changed to a voucher program, and help young people get an education and their piece of the American dream. I know we can do it—it is in the American DNA to tackle problems and succeed. I want to work on these issues for the rest of us. I would be honored to receive your vote on November 6th.
Carole Shea-Porter
Rochester
Former Congresswoman Carol Shea-Porter represented New Hampshire's First District from 2007-2011, she is seeking a third term in the November, 2012 election.